A list of specific new features in Aperture 1.5 includes:
Choose how you'd like to store images: copy them into a managed Aperture Library or store them on hard drives, network volumes, or CD/DVDs and have Aperture import them in place, creating a "reference" to their physical location while acquiring them for use in Aperture.
Browse albums, Smart Albums, or your entire Aperture Library using the Media Browser in iLife '06 and iWork '06 applications.
Generate industry-standard XMP sidecar files containing all metadata when exporting master images; or batch export metadata as a tab-delimited text file.
Precisely adjust hue, saturation, and luminance on a color-by-color basis using the red, yellow, green, cyan, blue, and magenta controls in the new Color tool.
Hone sharpness with the new, luminance-based Edge Sharpen tool, which offers precise control and a three-pass algorithm.
Create Metadata Presets to speed the assignment of any combination of metadata, eliminating errors and redundant typing.
Use onscreen controls on the new Loupe to dial in magnification (100- to 1600%), select focus mode (follow Loupe or follow cursor), control Loupe size, and turn on/off display of Color values.
Manage images (both copied and referenced) using new file-management tool for relocating and checking status of images in your Library.

I hope Aperture works on my new Mac Pro. It only has 1 GB of RAM and it says it requires 2 for the Mac Pro. Aperture 1.1 also supposedly required 2GB of RAM, but installed and ran with 1. Let's hope 1.5 is the same way. I don't want to spend $200+ more on RAM. If anybody has a Mac Pro w/ 1GB of RAM and the Aperture 1.5 update -- tell me if it installs/runs.

Also, why is it that the Mac Pro supposedly requires 1GB extra RAM over other computers?

Apple did this with FCP. They also gave the 1.5 away if you owned the earlier version.

Mel, the point is that AI's title can mislead people into thinking that Aperture 1.5 is available as a free download even to those who have never purchased a 1.0 or 1.1 license. What's available as a download is merely a free update, not an entire copy of the application.

Mel, the point is that AI's title can mislead people into thinking that Aperture 1.5 is available as a free download even to those who have never purchased a 1.0 or 1.1 license. What's available as a download is merely a free update, not an entire copy of the application.

I know. My first version of this post stated that. I thought that the post I replied to thought that as well. But then I reread it after I posted.

I went back and changed it, think that people HERE would be smart enough to know that. And, after all, the article is being read by us.

I hope Aperture works on my new Mac Pro. It only has 1 GB of RAM and it says it requires 2 for the Mac Pro. Aperture 1.1 also supposedly required 2GB of RAM, but installed and ran with 1. Let's hope 1.5 is the same way. I don't want to spend $200+ more on RAM. If anybody has a Mac Pro w/ 1GB of RAM and the Aperture 1.5 update -- tell me if it installs/runs.

Also, why is it that the Mac Pro supposedly requires 1GB extra RAM over other computers?

1.5 works excellent on my MacBook Pro with 1 GB RAM.

They actually really did an excellent job, everything is unbelievably speedy now.

They actually really did an excellent job, everything is unbelievably speedy now.

Mac Pro -- not MacBook Pro-- Anybody get a chance to test it on the Mac Pro?>> The Mac Pro supposedly requires 2 GB of RAM

The ironic part of course is just as I get a Mac Pro FOR Aperture, my 1.6 Ghz G5 PowerMac runs Aperture as well. It's all ok though because it will be much faster on the Mac Pro of course :-). Plus my Mac Pro's graphics card is now extremly sexy.

Mac Pro -- not MacBook Pro-- Anybody get a chance to test it on the Mac Pro?>> The Mac Pro supposedly requires 2 GB of RAM

The ironic part of course is just as I get a Mac Pro FOR Aperture, my 1.6 Ghz G5 PowerMac runs Aperture as well. It's all ok though because it will be much faster on the Mac Pro of course :-). Plus my Mac Pro's graphics card is now extremly sexy.

Sometimes Apple, as other companies do, state higher requirements to account for performance. I haven't downloaded the 1.5 update yet, but the older versions require a lot of memory for best performance. I tried it on my dual 2GHz G5. With all but 1GB of memory taken out, it was SLOWWW. When I put the other 3GB back in, it ran more than a bit faster.

A list of specific new features in Aperture 1.5 includes:
Choose how you'd like to store images: copy them into a managed Aperture Library or store them on hard drives, network volumes, or CD/DVDs and have Aperture import them in place, creating a "reference" to their physical location while acquiring them for use in Aperture.
Browse albums, Smart Albums, or your entire Aperture Library using the Media Browser in iLife '06 and iWork '06 applications.
Generate industry-standard XMP sidecar files containing all metadata when exporting master images; or batch export metadata as a tab-delimited text file.
Precisely adjust hue, saturation, and luminance on a color-by-color basis using the red, yellow, green, cyan, blue, and magenta controls in the new Color tool.
Hone sharpness with the new, luminance-based Edge Sharpen tool, which offers precise control and a three-pass algorithm.
Create Metadata Presets to speed the assignment of any combination of metadata, eliminating errors and redundant typing.
Use onscreen controls on the new Loupe to dial in magnification (100- to 1600%), select focus mode (follow Loupe or follow cursor), control Loupe size, and turn on/off display of Color values.
Manage images (both copied and referenced) using new file-management tool for relocating and checking status of images in your Library.

On the one hand, I feel sorry for you that nobody will give you a straightforward answer. Yes, it might work, but you really want someone who has a Mac Pro to answer the question definitively. (Alas, I have but a Power Mac G5 with 3.5 GB RAM)

On the other hand, I cannot fathom why anyone would buy a Mac Pro with only 1 GB of RAM. Every application that would justify buying a Mac Pro--Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Aperture--would definitely run much, much better with 2-4 GB of RAM.

On the other hand, I cannot fathom why anyone would buy a Mac Pro with only 1 GB of RAM. Every application that would justify buying a Mac Pro--Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Aperture--would definitely run much, much better with 2-4 GB of RAM.

Hopefully, it's a temporary step towards buying cheaper RAM from some other reliable supplier. I can't imaging buying one of these without more RAM.

But, I'll likely get two 1GB sicks from Apple, and the rest somewhere else.

Hopefully, it's a temporary step towards buying cheaper RAM from some other reliable supplier. I can't imaging buying one of these without more RAM.

But, I'll likely get two 1GB sicks from Apple, and the rest somewhere else.

Yes. I went for a 500 GB HD for supporting video editting and the increase file size of shooting in RAW, and I got the ATI video card for Aperture performance. Apple's RAM is the only of the three that is signifficantly cheaper elsewhere. I wasn't going to get another GB extra for a while though.

Yes. I went for a 500 GB HD for supporting video editting and the increase file size of shooting in RAW, and I got the ATI video card for Aperture performance. Apple's RAM is the only of the three that is signifficantly cheaper elsewhere. I wasn't going to get another GB extra for a while though.

I get enough RAM from Apple to run my programs at a good speed. Now, that means 2GB. Especially if you need Rosetta. That has been shown to run much better under 2GB.

MacWorld just did some tests that show that at least under certain circumstances, 2GB is again much faster. Particularly if you use four sticks.

I like to buy that much from Apple, because if there is a problem, I can remove the third party RAM, to test if that is a problem (sometimes it is), while still having enough to not slow the machine down on most work.

If you call Apple, or take your machine in, the first thing they ask, is that you remove all third party RAM.

I want to know if the machine is responding properly without it first.

If it is not contributing to the discussion you should just leave it out. Thats what generally makes a forum good or bad: a lot of relevant meaningful posts vs a lot of redundant posts that move the conversation know where.

Quote:

Originally Posted by melgross

I get enough RAM from Apple to run my programs at a good speed. Now, that means 2GB. Especially if you need Rosetta. That has been shown to run much better under 2GB.

MacWorld just did some tests that show that at least under certain circumstances, 2GB is again much faster. Particularly if you use four såticks.

I like to buy that much from Apple, because if there is a problem, I can remove the third party RAM, to test if that is a problem (sometimes it is), while still having enough to not slow the machine down on most work.

If you call Apple, or take your machine in, the first thing they ask, is that you remove all third party RAM.

I want to know if the machine is responding properly without it first.

It's worth the extra cost for that extra 1GB.

I know I SHOULD get an extra 1GB (and I plan on doing so). Where can I get reliable but cheapish RAM?

If it is not contributing to the discussion you should just leave it out. Thats what generally makes a forum good or bad: a lot of relevant meaningful posts vs a lot of redundant posts that move the conversation know where.

I know I SHOULD get an extra 1GB (and I plan on doing so). Where can I get reliable but cheapish RAM?